Salmonella Bacteria, Backyard Chickens and Safer Eggs

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC, salmonella bacteria causes about 1.4 million cases of foodborne illness each year. Salmonella bacteria in eggs account for 80% of the salmonella enteritidis infections. Symptoms—fever, diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and headache—can last a few days but is often lasts longer and can lead to severe complications or death. Salmonella causes more deaths than any other foodborne bacteria. The salmonella bacteria entered the chicken population in the last fifty or sixty years. Chickens harbor the salmonella bacteria without any signs of illness, making it impossible to know which animals are infected, and pass Salmonella along to both the yolk and white while the egg is forming in the ovaries and future generations of chickens. It is impossible to tell by appearance which eggs might be infected, and though in truth only a tiny proportion of eggs are infected, millions of eggs are consumed each day.

Federal regulations require pasteurization of raw liquid egg products used in commercially sold dishes such as ice cream, eggnog, sauces and ceasar dressings, but raw eggs sold in the shell to consumers are not required to be pasteurized. Less than 0.5% of all shell eggs produced for retail sale in the United State is pasteurized, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA. I take food safety very seriously since I feed not only my family every day, but I cook and host holiday celebrations and prepare food for community and group gatherings. A family tradition (and specialty) is homemade eggnog. It is made with raw eggs. The alcohol does not kill the salmonella bacteria, despite what bar tenders tell you. So, for approaching 20 years I have made the eggnog and other recipes using Davidson’s Pasteurized eggs now called “Safety Eggs.” I have not used these eggs exclusively because I find the texture of the whites is not quite right. When you use them in some recipes they do not rise properly without extra whisking, though I have managed with the help of my Kitchen Aid Mixmaster to beat dozens of the egg whites to soft peaks year after year.

From Davidson's web site

Now, however, researchers at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have developed a new technique and device for rapidly pasteurizing eggs in the shell reportedly without changing the texture of the egg white. The new method uses radio frequency (RF) energy to transmit heat through the shell and into the yolk while the egg rotates. While the yolk is heating cool water flows over the rotating egg to protect the white which is more sensitive to heat than the yolk. The RF energy creates an electric current that produces heat inside the egg. The egg is then bathed in hot water to pasteurize the white and finish pasteurizing the yolk.

The team lead by David Geveke from the USDA and Christopher Brunkhorst PPPL engineer, believes they have produced a pasteurized egg that is hardly discernible from a fresh, non-pasteurized egg. The USDA Agricultural Research Service in Wyndmoor, Pa. teamed up with PPPL engineer Christopher Brunkhorst, an expert in RF heating, to develop the method and device. The prototype can pasteurize shell eggs in about one-third of the time that current methods require. Current methods place the eggs in heated water for about an hour and change the consistency of the egg white. The RF process reportedly maintains the egg white's transparency and texture. The USDA has applied to patent the prototype design which, delivers RF energy through the shell by placing electrodes against opposite sides of the egg. The egg rests on rollers that turn it to distribute the cooling and heating water evenly.

Egg safety affects all of us. Remember, salmonella is not just a disease of commercial chickens. It's common these days for chickens, ducks, and other poultry to carry Salmonella. Live poultry kept as pets or to provide fresh eggs may harbor the salmonella bacteria. Salmonella bacteria live in the intestines of poultry and many other animals. Even organically fed poultry raised in a home setting can have Salmonella, because they were born with it. Live poultry can shed Salmonella bacteria in their droppings and from their bodies (feathers, feet, and beaks) even when they appear healthy and clean. The germs can also get on cages, coops, feed and water dishes, hay, plants, and soil in the area where the birds live and roam and can be picked up by children or adults who work or play where they live and roam. 

from CDC web site

Recently, a national outbreak of salmonella has been linked to an eastern New Mexico hatchery that sells live baby chickens, ducks and other poultry by mail and direct supply. New Mexico’s Department of Health said a strain of salmonella that's infected more than 300 people in 37 states was found in a duck pen at Privett Hatchery in Portales. According to the New Mexico Department of Health news release, salmonella infection is especially risky when parents keep the baby birds inside the house and allow their small children to handle and snuggle with them. Other cases can occur when parents don’t wash their hands properly after handling the birds, indirectly giving the infection to their children. Remember, these are backyard poultry. 

Prince William Allows Backyard Chickens with Limitations

On April 19th 2011 the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, voted to approve the latest staff proposal for a zoning change to allow backyard chickens in Prince William County. The approved amendment incorporated some of the less stringent requirements of the Planning Commission recommendations with the earlier staff recommendations. The amendment changes the zoning and land use regulations within the county. The full text, comments and history of the amendment can be read at this link.The new zoning regulations allow the keeping of chickens, pigeons, doves and other domestic fowl on any A-1 (agricultural) zoned property of at least one acre located within a Domestic Fowl Overlay District to be created by the Board of Supervisors. In addition, on properties zoned SR-1, SR-3 and SR-5 (semirural) with a minimum of one acre by Special Use Permit within the Domestic Fowl Overlay District. The keeping of domestic fowl is not permitted outside of the Domestic Fowl Overlay District, except on A-1 zoned lots of ten acres or larger. A Domestic Fowl Overlay District was created by ordinance upon resolution of the Board of County Supervisors and aligns roughly with the Rural Crescent.
 The maximum number of fowl allowed is proportional to the lot size. One bird unit per acre is allowed for properties of 1 to less than 5 acres, three bird units per acre for properties of 5 to less than 10 acres. There is no limit on the number of bird units allowed on properties greater than 10 acres. A bird unit is:
10 chickens (though only one rooster per acre) or
6 ducks or
4 turkeys, geese or pea fowl or
1 ostrich or emu
20 pigeons, doves, or quail

The new fowl regulations require coops or cages and runs on any lot with less than five acres and specifies construction standards and humane areas for each bird, distance from Resource Protected Areas (RPA) under the Chesapeake Bay Act, distance from well heads. In addition, waste management for surface and groundwater protection must be established using the new Prince William Soil and Water Conservation District guidelines. These guidelines should prevent (or at least significantly reduce) contamination of the groundwater, a major drinking water supply for the area, and prevent the backyard chickens from adding contaminated runoff to the Chesapeake Bay.

As our area has become more suburban, density has increased, along with the utilization of groundwater for domestic purposes and the density of septic systems. This suburban development has increased the suburban runoff and nutrient contamination to our groundwater and the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Virginia is under a federal mandate to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment contamination to the Chesapeake Bay. The federal pollution diet requires that Virginia reduce our non-point source pollution of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment. The only responsible way the County Supervisors could allow property owners the right to have backyard chickens was to control the waste in a way that would not add to the nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollution. It was appropriate and necessary for them to leverage the resource of the Prince William Soil and Water Conservation District to develop guidelines for low impact backyard chickens.
The proposed zoning change to allow backyard chickens contain limited regulations of the micro poultry “farms” to manage the waste and location of coops according to the protective separation requirements of the septic regulations. This hopefully will ensure that best management practices will be adopted by the backyard micro farmers without being unduly burdensom.

You may also want to read a later article https://greenrisks.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-rules-for-backyard-chickens-in.html

Environmental Chapter of Prince William County Comprehensive Plan

Prince William County as well as all interested parties have submitted their comments to the US EPA on the Chesapeake Bay TMDL and that comment period is now closed. I was fortunate to hear a summary of the PWC’s concerns and comments by Prince William County Public Works representative Marc Aveni. The Chesapeake Bay TMDL could eventually mean more monitoring and reporting on the county level and more government control of our lives.

The TMDL proposes very strict standards on both point and non-point sources of pollution. Everything from construction site runoff to individual lawn fertilization could become a regulatory issue. The Chesapeake Bay TMDL allocates nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollutant reductions to both point and nonpoint sources to meet the Bay's water quality standards, EPA expects Virginia and the other five watershed states and the District of Columbia to provide EPA with documented "reasonable assurance" that nonpoint source loading reductions will be achieved as a condition for reflecting such reductions in the Bay TMDL.

The meaning of reasonable assurance could be a costly issue in Virginia. Ultimately, because permits under the Clean Water Act (CWA) include effluent limitations necessary to achieve the Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL water quality standards, if nonpoint sources do not accomplish the loading reductions identified to EPA’s satisfaction or “reasonable assurances” then, more stringent effluent limits will be applied to CWA permits for point sources. This could cost millions upon millions of dollars because the higher level reductions in nutrients simply requires more treatment steps at waste water treatment plants and storm water systems. I am not a big fan of command and control method of regulation for all non-point source pollution. Unfortunately, regulatory command and control of the littlest corners of our lives is the only form of “reasonable assurances” that the US EPA recognizes.
.
Though the comment period has closed EPA has not yet taken final action on the Chesapeake Bay TMDLs it is clear the new regulations will focus on short-term, two-year goals called milestones by the EPA. Virginia and the six other Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions will be required to meet the soon to be finalized TMDL and future milestones, and will be required to put in place all pollution control measures the EPA deems necessary for a restored Bay no later than 2025. The final TMDL are scheduled to be met by December 31, 2011 and according to comments submitted to the EPA by Prince William County everything from construction site runoff to individual lawn fertilization, limitations on backyard chickens, and horse ownership could be under the microscope in order to meet the new TMDL within the framework of the EPA Chesapeake Bay pollution models. The federal TMDL could eventually mean more monitoring, reporting and possibly even more staff at the county level, though Prince William County Public Works believes they can meet the demands by fully staffing the two vacant FTEs.

Prince William County is holding public hearings on the environmental chapter of the PWC Comprehensive Plan on December 7th at 7:30 pm at the PWC offices at the McCoart Building at One County Complex Ct., Woodbridge, VA. If you have an interest and are local you should be there. I am anxious to hear the concerns of citizens, businesses and developers and to see if these comments relate to the Chesapeake Bay TMDL. I am hoping to gain insight into how Prince William and the other localities within the watershed will manage to navigate the requirements of the TMDL. I do look forward to seeing a fully restored Chesapeake Bay some day.

Backyard Chickens, Virginia Chesapeake Bay WIP, and October 5th

October 5th is a busy evening in Northern Virginia for the environment. On the agenda for the October 5th meeting of the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, is a proposal to change to the zoning and land use regulations within the county. Currently chickens and other farm animals are allowed on 2 acres or more of agricultural land, but only if there's no house on the land. If there's a house, the property is considered residential and chickens are not allowed. County staff and Planning Commission have offered two differing recommendations for changes to the zoning regulations. The Planning Commission would allow chickens on properties under two acres within the county's rural area, whereas staff recommended that all properties should have to be at least two acres. Two emus, ostriches and similar large birds would be allowed on parcels of at least two acres, but less than 10 acres.

There are two risks that should be carefully considered by the Prince William Board of County Supervisors when making this decision, potential contamination of the drinking water supply for the area and potential for contaminated runoff to impact the Chesapeake Bay. As our area has become more suburban, density has increased, along with the utilization of groundwater for domestic purposes and the density of septic systems. This suburban development has increased the suburban runoff and nutrient contamination to our groundwater and watershed. The proposed zoning change would allow additional nutrient load in the form of backyard poultry. Unless, the county intends to regulate the micro poultry “farms” and require the implementation of and maintenance of BMPs to manage the waste and locating of coops according to the protective separation requirements of the septic regulations, the Prince William Board of County Supervisors should consider only the more conservative staff recommendation.

Also on October 5th is the Northern Virginia’s EPA's Chesapeake Bay TMDL public meeting. The meeting is being held on October 5th from 6:00 to 8:00 pm at the Annandale, campus of Northern Virginia Community College. The address and building appear in the list below. There are 4 public meetings and a webinar scheduled for Virginia. The meetings are scheduled to allow EPA to have a 40-45 minutes presentation, followed by an overview of the Virginia WIP for 15-20 minutes, followed by Q&A and public comments for about 1 hour.

Over the past quarter century the excess nutrient contamination to the Chesapeake Bay has decreased, but the Bay’s waters remain seriously degraded. As a result, US EPA has taken control of the situation and has developed a new federally mandated total maximum daily load, TMDL, of contaminants to restore the local waters. The TMDL (released as a Draft standard in July) allocates a pollution budget among the states which will decrease over time. There is no segment of the Virginia watershed that meets the TMDL at this time, yet Prince William is considering increasing the nutrient load on properties by allowing backyard poultry.

Virginia's secretary of natural resources, Doug Domenech, submitted Virginia's Watershed Implementation Plan to the Environmental Protection Agency on Sept. 3, 2010. For the urban and suburban storm water to meet the federal mandated pollution diet, new developments will be subject to storm water management, urban nutrient management and erosion and sediment controls that have recently be implemented and development of a nutrient exchange program to encourage voluntary implementation of BMPs (best management practices). However, the new storm water regulations will not address the sediment and nutrient loads associated with existing development and septic systems, or even the proposed expansion of residential nutrient loads by allowing backyard poultry. EPA is mandating nutrient and sediment reductions to the EPA’s determined acceptable level on a segment by segment basis. Prince William Board of County Supervisors needs to carefully consider what steps they are going to have to take to meet the federally mandated reduction in TMDL when considering any zoning changes. Even with statewide compliance and the new storm water management regulation the WIP talks of restrictions on lawn and turf fertilizers, increasing regulation on both traditional and alternative septic systems. Increasing the waste load from backyard poultry does not fit into these reductions in nutrient runoff.

The WIP does not specify how Virginia will reduce nonpoint runoff pollution from farms, suburban and urban areas beyond allowing the local governments to make those decisions. Prince William Board of County Supervisors have the opportunity to demonstrate how communities in Virginia will rise to the occasion. The reaction by EPA to the WIP and their comments at the public meetings will tell us if the federal regulators intend to regulate down to the suburban backyard or if they will allow the Commonwealth to have the local communities address how to reduce their contributions to pollution in the Chesapeake Bay. The actions of the Prince William Board of County Supervisors will tell us if they can rise to the challenge of restoring and managing our natural resources.

The Prince William Board of County Supervisors will meet on Tuesday, Oct. 5, 2010, in the Board Chambers of the James J. McCoart Administration Building. The zoning change is scheduled for the evening session.

EPA's Chesapeake Bay TMDL public meetings are being held in Virginia October 4th to 7th 2010.

October 4 - from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. Grafton Theatre, James Madison University, 281 Warren Service Drive, Harrisonburg, VA.

October 5 - from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. Northern Virginia Community College, Annandale Campus, Ernst Community Cultural Center, 8333 Little River Turnpike, Annandale VA

October 6 - from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. Robins Pavilion Jepson Alumni Center, University of Richmond, 28 Westhampton Way, Richmond, VA

October 7, webinar 1:00 to 3:00 p.m.
https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/689259867

October 7 - from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. Crowne Plaza Hampton Marina Hotel, 700 Settlers Landing Road, Hampton, VA

Backyard Chickens and the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Comparing the small scale backyard raising of chickens to full scale agricultural operations as I did is not an appropriate or fair comparison because scale and density are important elements of their environmental impact. Nitrogen and phosphorus are essential nutrients of the growth of living organisms in our yards and in the Chesapeake Bay. However, excessive nitrogen and phosphorus degrade the water quality of our groundwater, surface water and the Chesapeake Bay-the entire water shed. As population density has increased in the watershed, the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment entering the bay has increased tremendously.

Each year, approaching 300 million pounds of nitrogen reaches the Chesapeake Bay. The majority of nitrogen pollution comes from sewage treatment plants, large-scale animal operations, agriculture, and air pollution from vehicle exhaust and power plants and other industrial sources. Other sources of nitrogen pollution include septic systems, runoff from roadways, development, residential and commercial lawn fertilizers, and small scale animal and agricultural sources (the keeping of horses, poultry, and other animals and growing vegetables in predominately suburban or exurban locations. Solutions to nitrogen pollution include upgrading sewage treatment plants, proper operation of septic systems, using nitrogen removal technologies on septic systems, and decreasing fertilizer applications to lawns and controlling suburban and exurban animal waste.

Over the past quarter century the excess nutrient contamination to the Chesapeake Bay has decreased in total, but the Bay’s waters remain seriously degraded and considerably short of attaining the 2010 water quality goals set forth in the Chesapeake 2000 agreement. As a result US EPA is developing a new federally mandated Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) plan to establish and apportion an allowable pollution budget among the states.

Over the past 25 years, nitrogen released to the Chesapeake Bay has fallen about 33% from agriculture, fallen about 40% from waste treatment plants, but increased about 15% from septic and mixed open use. During that same period of time phosphorus released into the Chesapeake Bay has fallen about 29% from agriculture, fallen about 65% from waste treatment plants and increased about 14% from septic and mixed open use. The population in the region has increased by more than 20% (including the urban core) during this time period.

According to the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, the typical household generates 10-15 pounds of nitrogen per year and 1-2 pounds of phosphorus per year. According to a Maryland state study, each chicken generates approximately 0.41 lbs of Nitrogen per year and around 0.35 pounds of phosphorus per year. Thus, each household with 10 chickens would generate 4.1 pounds of nitrogen and 3.5 pounds of phosphorus per year. This is a significant increase in the nutrient load of a typical house hold, a more than three fold increase in phosphorus load and an increase of nitrogen load by more than 30%. This additional waste is delivered in an uncontrolled manner. The poor location of a chicken coop could potentially impact ground water and well heads both on and off site and should be subject to the same off sets as septic systems. In addition the nutrient load has to be addressed.

Dutchess County New York did a study to monitor the effectiveness of septic set backs and studied nitrate concentrations. They chose to use nitrate concentrations at half the drinking water level as a proxy for adequate dilution and natural attenuation of all contaminants. Historically, horizontal and vertical setbacks were developed without consideration of the dilution for wastewater components like nitrate and phosphorus. The NY Department of Health separation distances were assumed (and these are almost identical to the Virginia setbacks), but the overall regional density of septic systems was examined to ensure that groundwater resources would not be overwhelmed by the total load of contaminants. The density recommendations were developed based on the nitrate concentrations. Nitrate was used as a proxy because all humans produce nitrate, it does not easily break down and there is a drinking water standard. The target concentration was half the drinking water level to ensure all outcomes are safely below the standard since household size can vary tremendously. The Dutchess County study found that overall average density of on-site waste disposal should not exceed one unit per 2-3 acres for an average size household to ensure water quality.

Adequate dilution, soil filtration and time are necessary to ensure sustainable water quality. Unfortunately, by adding 10 chickens to a yard you have increased the nutrient load significantly, tripling the phosphorus and increasing the nitrogen by 30%. The geology of this area consists of an interbedded sequence of sedimentary and basaltic rocks. The rocks of the Culpeper basin are highly fractured and overlain by a thin cover of overburden. The lack of overburden limits natural protection to the aquifer. The sedimentary rocks create a productive aquifers, but allow contaminate to easily wash into the groundwater basin. Allowing backyard chickens represent a significant threat to the groundwater basin.